因明入正理論疏 3.153

3.153

述曰：此解似中大文第二，結非真也。言如是者，即指法之詞。復言等者，顯有不盡。向辯三支，皆據申言而有過故，未明缺減，非在言申，故以等等。復云似宗、因、喻者，等彼缺減，後牒前三，總結非真，故是言也。若爾，何故不言如是似宗、因、喻等，而云如是等似宗、因、喻耶？答：「喻下言等，恐有離前似宗、因、喻別有似支，顯離此三更無有別似宗、因、喻，故於前等。」

The Commentary states: This is the second major section in explaining the pseudo-[members], concluding that they are not genuine. Saying 'such' is an expression pointing to the phenomena. Furthermore, saying 'and so forth' indicates that it is not exhaustive. The previous analysis of the three members was based entirely on fallacies arising from explicit verbal statement; it did not explain structural deficiencies that are not explicitly voiced, so it uses 'and so forth'. Furthermore, stating 'pseudo-theses, pseudo-reasons, and pseudo-examples' encompasses those deficiencies, and then, repeating the former three, concludes generally that they are not genuine; hence this statement. If so, why does it not say 'such pseudo-theses, reasons, examples, and so forth', but instead says 'such and so forth pseudo-theses, reasons, and examples'? Answer: 'Saying "and so forth" after "examples" might raise the suspicion that apart from the preceding pseudo-theses, pseudo-reasons, and pseudo-examples there are other pseudo-members; to show that apart from these three there are no other distinct pseudo-theses, reasons, or examples, "and so forth" is placed before them.'